Criminal court statistics quarterly, England and Wales, January to March 2017

Including statistics on the use of language interpreter and translation services in courts and tribunals

Outstanding cases in magistrates courts have fallen

In 2016, disposals remained higher than receipts which resulted in the number of outstanding cases dropping by 11% from 327,200 in 2015 to 291,400 in 2016.

Outstanding cases in the Crown Court have fallen

Both receipts and disposals fell during 2016, by 10% and 6% respectively from 2015. Disposals remained higher than receipts in 2016, continuing to drive the decrease in outstanding cases.

The overall guilty plea rate in the Crown Court was 67% in 2016

Since 2014 the guilty plea rate has fallen from 70% to 67% in 2016, the lowest rate since 2006. The proportion of guilty pleas entered prior to trial was 61% in 2016.

Average waiting times have fallen since 2015

Average waiting times have fallen slightly for both guilty plea and not guilty plea trials, to 15.1 weeks and 32.3 weeks respectively in 2016.

The average number of days from first listing to completion in the Crown Court has decreased

For cases completing in the Crown Court the average number of days from first listing at the magistrates’ court to completion in the Crown Court decreased by 2 days from 196 days in 2015 to 194 days in 2016.

Interpreters: The success rate of completed service requests remained stable

The success rate for completed language interpreter and translation service requests was 97% in Q1 2017, similar to Q1 2016.

This is the annual edition of the ‘Criminal courts statistics quarterly’ publication and will feature analysis on a calendar year basis.

The technical guide to Criminal court statistics can be found here: www.gov.uk/government/publications/a-guide-to-criminal-court-statistics

1 All the statistics on the use of language interpreter and translation services in courts and tribunals are Official Statistics, except the statistics under the new contracts which are ‘Provisional Statistics’.

1. Criminal cases in the magistrates’ courts

Outstanding cases in magistrates courts have fallen by 11% between 2015 and 2016

Receipts decreased by 4% between 2015 and 2016, whilst disposals decreased by 2%. Overall in 2016, disposals remained higher than receipts which resulted in the number of outstanding cases falling by 11% from 327,200 at the end of 2015 to 291,400 at the end of 2016.

Figure 1: Magistrates’ courts caseload, Q2 2012 to Q1 2017 (Source: Table M1)

Magistrates’ court caseload (Figure 1)

The number of receipts decreased by 4% from 2015 to 1.53 million in 2016. However, the number of receipts has risen in the latest quarter by 3% from Q4 2016 to 384,800 in Q1 2017.

Between 2015 and 2016, the number of disposals decreased by 2% from 1.59 million to 1.57 million in 2016. Since Q4 2016, the number of disposals has increased by 9% to 401,900 in Q1 2017.

With disposals continuing to be higher than receipts, the number of outstanding cases fell by 11% from 327,200 at the end of 2015 to 291,400 at the end of 2016. Since Q4 2016, the number of outstanding cases has decreased further by 1% to 288,500 in Q1 2017. Effectiveness of magistrates’ courts’ trials

Figure 2: Trial effectiveness in magistrates’ courts, 2010 and 2016 (Source: Table M2)

Since 2010 the total number of trials in magistrates’ courts has fallen by 17% to 149,400 in 2016. Of these trials, the proportion that were effective increased over the period by 4 percentage points to 47%, whilst the proportion of cracked trials fell by 1 percentage point to 38% and the proportion of ineffective trials fell by 3 percentage points to 15%.

Figure 3: Cracked trials by reasons in magistrates’ courts, 2010 and 2016 (Source: Table AM2)

The proportion of trials that cracked due to ‘acceptable guilty plea(s) entered late’ has decreased by 7 percentage points since 2010. There has been a corresponding increase in the proportion that have cracked due to ‘prosecution end case’, where the prosecution decides not to proceed the case against the defendant, increasing by 12 percentage points to 46% in 2016.

Figure 4: Ineffective trials by reasons in magistrates’ courts, 2010 and 2016 (Source: Table AM1)

The most common reasons for an ineffective trial are ‘court administration’ and ‘defendant absent/unfit to stand’, with both of these proportions increasing since 2010 by 3 and 4 percentage points respectively. Alongside these increases, the proportion of ineffective trials due to ‘prosecution witness absent’ has fallen since 2010 by 4 percentage points to 14% in 2016. 2. Criminal cases in the Crown Court

Outstanding cases in Crown Court fell to 42,100 at the end of 2016

Both receipts and disposals fell during 2016, by 10% and 6% respectively from 2015. Disposals remained higher than receipts in 2016, continuing to drive the decrease in outstanding cases, which have declined in each of the last two years.

Figure 5: Crown Court caseload annual trend, 2000 to 2016 (Source: Table C1)

Receipts (Figure 5, table C1)

Overall, receipts rose by 36% from 2000 to a peak of 152,800 in 2010. They then decreased by 13% between 2010 and 2012 followed by a small increase to 2013 before reducing by 16% between 2013 and 2016. The number of receipts in 2016 was the lowest since 2000 (117,200).

The overall trend in receipts has been mostly driven by triable-either-way cases which, following a peak in 2014, have seen a decline of 24% between 2014 and 2016. Indictable only case receipts have followed a similar trend but to a lesser extent, falling by 16% since 2014. More recently, committed for sentence receipts have increased by 3% between 2015 and 2016, whilst appeals against magistrates’ decisions case receipts have fallen by around 8% over the same period.

Following a decline during 2016, receipts increased by 5% between Q4 2016 and Q1 2017 to 29,700 (table C1). This change since Q4 2016 has been driven by the 7% increase in receipts for cases committed for sentence, a 4% increase in triable-either-way receipts and a 5% increase in indictable only case receipts. The number of receipts for appeals against magistrates’ decisions remained stable in the latest quarter. Disposals (Figure 5, table C1)

Following a fairly similar pattern to receipts, disposals rose by 32% between 2000 and 2010 but then fell by 18% to 126,300 in 2016. Disposals were higher than receipts in both 2015 and 2016, the first times since 2012.

Similar to receipts, the overall trend in disposals has been mainly driven by triable-either-way cases, with an overall decrease of 18% between 2010 and 2016. Indictable only disposals, which are lower in volume than triable-either-way disposals, have gradually declined since 2013, with an overall decrease of 11% between 2013 and 2016. Committed for sentence disposals fell between 2011 and 2015, followed by a small increase of 4% in 2016. Appeals against magistrates’ decisions case disposals have decreased by 6% between 2015 and 2016.

Disposals increased in Q1 2017, with a 10% rise to 31,700 from Q4 2016, although they were still 6% lower than in Q1 2016. This increase in disposals in Q1 2017 was mainly driven by the 10% increase in triable-either-way and 12% increase in committed for sentence case disposals. Disposals for indictable only and appeals against magistrates’ decisions cases also increased in the quarter, but to a lesser extent at 7% and 9% respectively. Disposals have now remained higher than receipts for the last 9 quarters, driving the declining trend in outstanding cases (table C1).

Outstanding cases (Figure 5, table C1)

Between 2000 and 2009, there was a 53% rise in outstanding cases. Following a decrease in outstanding cases between 2010 and 2012, cases subsequently rose between 2012 and 2014. Since then outstanding cases have fallen by 24% to 42,100 at the end of 2016. This decline reflects the number of disposals being higher than receipts through 2015 and 2016. At the end of 2016 the number of outstanding cases were at the lowest level since 2012.

Following an increase in the number of outstanding triable-either way cases from 2012 to a peak in 2014, there was a sharp decline of 32% between 2014 and 2016. Indictable only cases have followed a similar trend but to a lesser extent falling by 20% between 2014 and 2016. Following a period of fluctuation, committed for sentence outstanding cases have been fairly stable since 2012. The number of outstanding cases for appeals against magistrates’ decisions has remained fairly stable throughout the time series.

Between Q4 2016 and Q1 2017, outstanding cases declined by 5% to 40,000 cases, the lowest number since Q1 2013 (table C1). This decline in outstanding cases at the end of Q1 2017 was mainly driven by the 6% decline in triable-either-way outstanding cases. Outstanding cases also declined for indictable only cases by 3%, committed for sentence by 5% and appeals against magistrates’ decisions by 8%. Receipts by offence group ² (Figure 6)

In 2016 the four offence groups with the highest number of for trial receipts, in order, were; violence against the person, miscellaneous crimes against society, drug offences and theft offences. The number of receipts for these offences have been declining since 2014; by 21% for violence against the person offences, by 14% for miscellaneous crimes against society, by 25% for drug offences and by 32% for theft offences. Following an increasing trend since 2012, receipts for sexual offences also fell slightly between 2015 and 2016, falling by 3% to 9,500 in 2016.

Between Q4 2016 and Q1 2017 the number of receipts for violence against the person and drug offences increased by 7% and 6% respectively. Over the same time period, receipts for theft offences had a 2% increase, whilst miscellaneous crimes against society receipts had a 2% decline.

Figure 7: For trial case disposals by offence group, Q1 2010 to Q1 2017 (Source: Pivot table 1)

² The analysis of the data by individual offence group in the Crown Court excludes summary offences due to small numbers and also excludes unknown offences. Disposals by offence group (Figure 7)

Similar to receipts, the offence groups in 2016 with the highest number of for trial disposals, in order, were: violence against the person, miscellaneous crimes against society, drug offences and theft offences. Between 2013 and 2015 the number of disposals slowly increased, although this was followed by a decrease for all four of the offence groups listed; between 2015 and 2016 disposals for violence against the person fell by 11%, miscellaneous crimes against society by 2%, drug offences by 12% and theft offences by 16%. Unlike most offence groups, the number of disposals for sexual offences increased by 8% from 2015 to 10,200 in 2016.

More recently, between Q4 2016 and Q1 2017, the number of disposals increased for the four offence groups listed. Violence against the person disposals increased by 8%, miscellaneous crimes against society by 14%, drug offences by 13% and theft offences by 12%.

Figure 8: For trial cases outstanding at the end of the quarter, by offence group, Q1 2010 to Q1 2017 (Source: Pivot table 1)

Outstanding cases by offence group (Figure 8)

At the end of 2016 the four offences with the highest number of for trial outstanding cases, in order, were: violence against the person, sexual offences, miscellaneous crimes against society and drug offences. The number of outstanding cases has fallen throughout 2016 for all offence groups. For three of the largest offence groups; violence against the person, miscellaneous crimes against society and drug offences, the number of outstanding cases have been falling since their numbers peaked at the end of Q1 2015; by the end of 2016, violence against the person outstanding cases were 16% lower than at the end of 2015, miscellaneous crimes against society offences were 20% lower and drug offences were 27% lower. Outstanding cases of sexual offences peaked at 6,600 at the end of Q1 2016, but have decreased overall by 9%, from 6,500 to 5,900 cases, between 2015 and 2016, this has been driven by the number of disposals becoming higher than receipts in 2016.

In the most recent quarter, the number of outstanding cases has fallen for most offence groups. At the end of Q1 2017 the number of cases outstanding fell for violence against the person by 4%, sexual offences by 7%, miscellaneous crimes against society by 10% and drug offences by 4% compared with the previous quarter. The proportion of effective trials has increased to 51% in 2016 Since 2010 the proportion of trials that were effective has gradually increased to 51% in 2016, with a corresponding decrease in cracked trials to 34% in 2016. The proportion of ineffective trials has remained at a similar level, at 15% in 2016.

Figure 9: Effectiveness of Crown Court trials, 2010 and 2016 (Source: Table C2)

Effectiveness of Crown Court trials (Figure 9) In 2010 the percentage of Crown Court trials that were effective was the lowest proportion recorded, at 44%. Between 2010 and 2016 the proportion of effective trials increased overall by 7 percentage points to 51%, whilst the proportion of trials that were cracked had a corresponding 8 percentage point decrease from 43% in 2010 to 34% in 2016. The proportion of trials that were ineffective has remained fairly stable, increasing by around 1 percentage point since 2010 to 15% in 2016.

Figure 10: Cracked trials by reasons in Crown Court, 2010 and 2016 (Source: Table AC3)

‘Defendant enters late guilty plea’ is the main reason for cracked trials; since 2010 the proportion of cracked trials where the defendant has entered a late guilty plea has increased by 3 percentage points to 66% in 2016. A corresponding decrease can be seen in the percentage of cracked trials due to ‘defendant pleads guilty to alternative charge’ which decreased by 2 percentage points since 2010. In 2016 ‘defendant absent/unfit to stand’ was the most frequent reason for an ineffective trial at 26%, an increase of 4 percentage points since 2010. A corresponding decrease can be seen in the proportion of trials that were ineffective due to ‘prosecution witness absent’ which has decreased by 5 percentage points since 2010 to 16% in 2016.

Trial effectiveness by offence group (Figure 12)

In 2016, the proportion of effective trials for all offences was 51%, sexual offences had the highest proportion of effective trials at 79%. Criminal damage and arson had the lowest proportion of effective trials at 36% in 2016, and also had the highest proportion of cracked trials at 47%. For the majority of the offence groups the proportion of ineffective trials was between 15% and 18% in 2016, but sexual offences had a much lower proportion of ineffective trials at 9%, whilst fraud offences had a much higher proportion of ineffective trials at 20%. The overall guilty plea rate in the Crown Court was 67% in 2016 Since 2014 the guilty plea rate has fallen from 70% to 67% in 2016, the lowest rate since 2006. The proportion of guilty pleas entered prior to trial was 61% in 2016.

Figure 13: Guilty plea rate in the Crown Court, 2001 to 2016 (Source: Table C3)

Guilty plea rate in all trial cases (Figure 13) Between 2001 and 2009 the guilty plea rate increased by 14 percentage points to 71%. Between 2010 and 2015 the guilty plea rate fluctuated between 70% and 68%, standing at 69% in 2015. Since then it has fallen slightly to 67% in 2016, the lowest level since 2006. In the latest quarter the guilty plea rate has increased slightly, from 65% in Q4 2016 to 66% in Q1 2017.

Figure 14: Stage at which a plea of guilty was entered in the Crown Court, 2010 and 2016 (Source: Table C4)

Stage at which a plea of guilty was entered in all trial cases (Figure 14) Since 2010 the proportion of guilty pleas that were entered ‘prior to trial’ has fallen, from 68% to 61% in 2016. Corresponding with this fall was an increase in the proportion of guilty pleas resulting in a ‘cracked trial’; despite a decrease in the volumes, the proportion pleading guilty at this stage increased by 3 percentage points from 2010 to 28% in 2016. The proportion where a guilty plea was entered ‘at other hearings’ also increased, by 4 percentage points to 7%. The proportion of guilty pleas entered during trial or at an unknown stage have remained fairly constant throughout the time series, at around 1% and 3% respectively. Figure 15: Guilty plea rate by offence group in the Crown Court, 2016 (Source: Pivot table 3)

Guilty plea rate in all trial cases by offence (Figure 15)

In 2016 the offence group with the highest guilty plea rate was drug offences at 82%, compared to the overall guilty plea rate of 67% for all offences. The offence group with the lowest guilty plea rate was sexual offences at 34%. Violence against the person had the second lowest guilty plea rate (62%) but still had a much higher rate than sexual offences.

Figure 16: Stage at which a plea of guilty was entered by offence, in the Crown Court, 2016 (Source: Pivot 3)

Stage at which a plea of guilty was entered in all trial cases by offence group (Figure 16)

In 2016, the proportion of guilty pleas entered prior to trial was 61% for all offences. The offence group with the greatest proportion of guilty pleas prior to trial was drug offences at 67%, these cases are more likely to have substantial evidence which may influence an earlier plea. The offence group with the smallest proportion of guilty pleas prior to trial at 51% was violence against the person. Violence against the person also had the highest proportion of guilty pleas resulting in a cracked trial at 39%, 11 percentage points higher than the ‘all offences’ figure of 28%. Average waiting times have fallen since 2015 Average waiting times have fallen slightly for both guilty plea and not guilty plea trials, to 15.1 weeks and 32.3 weeks respectively in 2016.

Average hearing times increased slightly between 2015 and 2016 The average hearing time for not guilty plea trials was 13.8 hours in 2016, a small increase of 0.2 hours from 13.6 hours in 2015. Similarly, the average hearing time of guilty plea trials, increased by 0.1 hours to 1.6 hours in 2016.

Figure 17: Average waiting time in Crown Court by plea, Q1 2010 to Q1 2017 (Source: Table C6)

Average waiting times at the Crown Court (Figure 17) Average waiting times for all trial cases increased between 2013 and 2015, but have recently been followed by a small decrease between 2015 and 2016, decreasing by 0.5 weeks to 15.1 weeks for guilty plea trials in 2016 and by 0.4 weeks to 32.3 weeks for not guilty plea trials. Waiting times have continued to decrease in the latest quarter; since Q4 2016 the average waiting time for guilty plea trials has decreased by 0.6 weeks to 14.3 weeks in Q1 2017 and by 0.8 weeks to 30.5 weeks for not guilty plea trials. Average waiting times by offence group (Figure 18)

The 2 offence groups with the longest waiting times in 2016 were fraud offences (29.2 weeks) and sexual offences (26.6 weeks); these are cases which tend to be complex and can require ticketed judges, so may require more time to prepare. The offences with the shortest average waiting times were drug offences at 16.1 weeks and theft offences at 16.3 weeks.

Figure 19: Average hearing time in Crown Court by case type, Q1 2010 to Q1 2017 (Source: Table C6) Average hearing times at the Crown Court (Figure 19)

Average hearing times for not guilty plea trials slowly increased to 14.1 hours in 2013, they fell to 13.6 hours in 2015, after which they increased slightly to around 13.8 hours in 2016. Towards the end of 2016 the average hearing time for not guilty plea trials began to increase and was at 14.6 hours in Q4 2016, increasing to 15.5 hours in Q1 2017. Hearing times for all guilty plea trials have gradually increased since 2010, increasing overall by 0.4 hours from 1.3 hours to 1.6 hours in 2016.

Figure 20: Average hearing time for all trial cases in Crown Court by offence, 2016 (Source: Pivot 3)

Average hearing times by offence group (Figure 20)

The average hearing time for all trial cases was 5.5 hours in 2016. Similar to the pattern for waiting times, the offence groups with the longest average hearing times in 2016 were sexual offences (11.0 hours) and fraud offences (9.6 hours). Theft offences had the lowest average hearing time in 2016 at 2.7 hours, whilst criminal damage and arson had a similar average hearing time at just over 2.7 hours. The proportion of defendants with known representation(^3) has fallen since 2010

In 2016, 93% of defendants had known representation compared to 95% in 2010.

**Representation by year(^3) (table AC10)**

The proportion of defendants dealt with in the Crown Court who were known to have had legal representation(^3) has decreased by 2 percentage points between 2010 and 2016. During 2016, 93% (81,600) of defendants were represented by an advocate at the first hearing whilst 7% (6,200) of defendants had no advocate or unknown representation at first hearing. This compares to 95% and 5% respectively in 2010.

The proportion of defendants represented at first hearing by an advocate only, with no solicitor representation, had increased between 2010 and 2015, but has since fallen in 2016. In 2016, of those defendants represented by an advocate, the proportion with no solicitor accounted for 16% (13,300), a 2 percentage point drop on the 2015 figure of 18% (16,500); the 2016 figure of 16% is still higher than in 2010, however, when it was 2% (2,300).

**Representation and hearings**

In 2016, 36% of represented defendants had two or less hearings, while 16% of defendants whose representation was unknown or were known to be unrepresented had two or less hearings. Conversely, 17% of represented defendants had six or more hearings, compared with 31% who had no or unknown representation.

**Guilty plea cases had the highest proportion of defendants elected to the Crown Court at the ‘direction of magistrates’**

In 2016 94% of defendants pleading guilty in the magistrates’ courts were elected to the Crown Court at the ‘direction of magistrates’.

**Table 21: Election type in Crown court by plea, in 2016 (Source: Table AC13)**

| Election of defendants in the Crown Court (Figure 21) | |------------------------------------------------------| | In 2016, those pleading guilty at the magistrates’ courts had a greater proportion of defendants elected to the Crown Court at the ‘direction of magistrates’ at 94%, while those pleading not guilty had a much lower proportion at 87%. |

(^3) Representation is classed as defendants who were known to be represented by an advocate or solicitor at first hearing. 3. Timeliness

The average number of days from first listing to completion in the Crown Court has decreased

For cases completing in the Crown Court the average number of days from first listing in magistrates’ courts to completion in the Crown Court decreased by 2 days from 196 days in 2015 to 194 days in 2016.

Figure 22: Average number of days (mean) from first listing in the magistrates’ courts to completion in the Crown Court, for Crown Court criminal cases, Q2 2010 to Q1 2017 (Source: Table T4)

Crown Court criminal cases - First listing in the magistrates’ courts to completion in the Crown Court (Figure 22)

The overall time from first listing to completion in the Crown Court decreased between 2015 and 2016, which also corresponded to a fall in the number of outstanding cases.

The average time from first listing at the magistrates’ court to receipt by the Crown Court has remained at around 6 days, the time from receipt at the Crown Court to main hearing has remained at 138 days, whilst time from main hearing to completion has decreased slightly from 52 days in 2015 to 51 days in 2016.

The overall time from first listing to completion in the Crown Court peaked at 218 days in Q4 2016, the highest of the time series, before decreasing to 178 days in Q1 2017. The majority of this decrease in the latest quarter was in the time from receipt at the Crown Court to main hearing, which decreased by 28 days from 155 days in Q4 2016 to 127 days in Q1 2017. This decrease in waiting times is possibly as a result of the courts having cleared some of their backlog of outstanding cases. Figure 23: Average duration of all criminal court cases from charge to completion by offence, 2016 (Source: Table T6)

The average duration from charge to completion for all criminal court cases was 67 days in 2016. This ranged from 53 days for summary non-motoring cases to 232 days for sexual offences cases.

Figure 24: Number of defendants in cases completed in the magistrates’ courts, by single justice cases and other cases, Q1 2015 to Q1 2017 (Source: Tables T1 and T2)

Magistrates’ court criminal cases – number of defendants in Single Justice Procedure cases (Figure 24)

46% of defendants in cases completed in the magistrates’ courts in Q1 2017 were in Single Justice Procedure cases, up from 41% in Q4 2016. The Single Justice Procedure was introduced in May 2015, and since then the proportion of total cases completed has steadily increased in each quarter. Annex A: Enforcement of financial impositions

Total financial impositions increased by 10% between 2015 and 2016

Total financial impositions have increased between 2015 and 2016 due to increased fines and compensations in 2016.

Figure 25: HMCTS management information: Financial impositions by imposition type, England and Wales, Q2 2011 – Q1 2017 (Source: Table A2)

Note: The Criminal Court Charge (CCC) ceased to exist on 24 December 2015 but impositions still appear due to when the data are entered onto the system.

Financial impositions and amounts paid by imposition type (Figure 25, table A2)

Despite the cessation of the CCC at the end of 2015 total financial impositions still increased overall by 10% between 2015 and 2016, mainly due to the 35% increase in fine impositions during 2016. They have also increased in the latest quarter, driven by the 10% increase in compensation impositions between Q4 2016 and Q1 2017 as well as the 9% increase in victims surcharge impositions during that same period.

In 2016, 14% (£88 million) of all criminal court financial impositions were paid within the imposition month, an increase of 3 percentage points compared to 2015.

Outstanding financial impositions (Table A4)

In 2016, the total value of financial impositions outstanding in England and Wales was £776 million. The amount of outstanding financial impositions has been increasing since Q1 2014, and showed an increase of 8% between Q4 2016 and Q1 2017. The increase since Q2 2015 is partially due to owed criminal court charge payments. Annex B: Juror Statistics

The number of juror summons increased by 2% in 2016

There was a small increase in juror summons to 369,300 in 2016, whilst the proportion of juror summons excused remained the same at 27%.

There were 369,300 juror summons issued in 2016, a 2% increase compared to the number of juror summons issued in 2015. Around 27% of all juror summons (99,900) were excused, the same proportion as the previous year. There were 180,800 jurors supplied to the court in 2016, an increase of 1% from 2015.

Figure 26: Number of juror sitting days and juror utilisation rate, 2006 to 2016 (Source: table J2)

The juror utilisation rate is the number of sitting days divided by the sum of sitting, non-sitting and non-attendance days. Since 2006 the juror utilisation rate has risen, overall, by 11 percentage points to the current rate of 70% in 2016, although more recently it has dropped slightly from 72% in 2014. The overall increase may be the result of the introduction of a programme on the part of HMCTS to reduce the burden on jurors and make the best use of their time. Annex C: The use of language interpreter and translation services in courts and tribunals

New contractors from November 2016

From 31 October 2016, language interpreter and translation services have started to be delivered by two new suppliers. A new independent quality assurance service has also started to be provided by The Language Shop (London Borough of Newham). This replaces the old contract MoJ had with Capita Translation and Interpreting. The data within this release covers face-to-face spoken and non-spoken interpretation services. For more detail please see the accompanying technical guide.

The off contract figures continue to be official statistics as these data are unaffected by the contract change. However, bookings and complaints from 31 October 2016 made under the new contract are published as ‘provisional’ statistics as differences in deliverables across the old and new contracts mean these are still subject to review.

The total number of completed service requests was slightly higher in Q1 2017 compared to the same period in 2016

A total of 39,900 completed service requests for language interpreter and translation services were made in Q1 2017, a 4% increase compared to Q1 2016

The success rate of completed service requests in Q1 2017 was similar to Q1 2016

The success rate for completed service requests was 97% in Q1 2017, similar to Q1 2016

Figure 27: Number of completed language service requests and overall success rate, Q1 2013 to Q1 2017 (Source: Table L1) Completed service requests (Figure 27)

A total of 155,200 completed service requests for language interpreter and translation services were made in 2016, a 1% increase compared to 2015. Between 2015 and 2016, the total number of requests made by criminal courts decreased by 11% to 78,100, while the total number of requests made by tribunals and civil and family courts increased by 11% (to 51,600) and 23% (to 24,000) respectively.

In Q1 2017, there were 39,900 completed service requests, an increase of 4% from the same quarter in 2016. Criminal courts made the greatest use of face-to-face language interpreter and translation services; 45% of completed service requests were for criminal cases (including Crown Court and magistrates courts completed cases), 36% were for tribunal cases, and 14% were for civil and family court cases. In comparison to Q1 2016, completed service requests for criminal courts have continued to decrease into Q1 2017, tribunals have continued to increase, whilst civil and family have returned to the same level.

In Q1 2017, 84% of all bookings were fulfilled, while 3% were unfulfilled and 13% were cancelled. Both fulfilled and unfulfilled bookings increased by one percentage point compared to Q1 2016, while the proportion of cancelled bookings decreased by one percentage point.

Success rate (Figure 6)

The success rate for completed service requests in 2016 was 96%, a 1 percentage point decrease compared to 2015.

In Q1 2017, the overall success rate was 97%, similar to the same quarter in 2016. Standard language requests had a success rate of 98%, similar to Q1 2016, whilst the success rate for rare language requests had decreased by 6 percentage points from 92% in Q1 2016 to 86% in Q1 2017. In contrast, the success rate of special services requests had increased by 7 percentage points from 93% in Q1 2016 to over 99% in Q1 2017. The number of complaints was higher in Q1 2017 compared to the same period in 2016

A total of 730 complaints for completed service requests were made in Q1 2017, compared to 440 in Q1 2016.

The total number of ‘off contract’ service requests increased between Q1 2016 and Q1 2017

The total number of ‘off contract’ service requests increased from 220 in Q1 2016 to 370 in Q1 2017.

Figure 28: Number of complaints and complaint rate, Q1 2013 to Q1 2017 (Source: Table L2)

Number of complaints and complaint rate (Figure 28)

The total number of complaints made in 2016 was similar to 2015. Although the total number of complaints remained at a similar level in the first three quarters of 2016, thereafter there was an increase from 430 in Q3 2016 to 740 in Q4 2016 and 730 in Q1 2017.

In Q1 2017 the complaint rate was just under 2%, compared to just over 1% in Q1 2016. However, the complaint rate is still lower compared to the start of the period under the old contract, 4% in 2013, and is broadly in line with complaint rates of two years ago when the complaint rate in each of the four quarters in 2014 was 2%. The most common cause of complaint in Q1 2017 was ‘Interpreter was late’ which accounted for 23% (170) of all complaints; this was also the most common cause of complaint in Q1 2016 (37%, 160). The complaint rate was highest in tribunals at just under 3% in Q1 2017, compared to just over 2% in Q1 2016, with the most common complaint being ‘interpreter was late’ (110). The complaint rate at criminal courts was just above 1% in Q1 2017 compared to just below 1% in Q1 2016. This is consistent with the proportion of ineffective trials from the criminal courts section for which interpreter availability is recorded as the reason for the trial being ineffective (2%).

**Off contract requests (Table L3)**

The number of ‘off contract’ service requests increased throughout 2016, with the largest increase of 49% between Q3 2016 (440 requests) and Q4 2016 (650 requests). This was followed by a decrease to 370 in Q1 2017.

‘Off contract’ requests at tribunals decreased from 310 in Q4 2016 to 200 in Q1 2017, accounting for 52% of all completed ‘off contract’ service requests for language interpreter and translation services in the latest quarter. Criminal courts accounted for 42% (160 requests), whilst civil & family courts accounted for 6% (20). Annex D: Further information on criminal courts data

The data presented in this publication are provisional. Final data for each calendar year is published in June each year in our Criminal Courts Statistics annual bulletin, following further data cleaning and the incorporation of additional cases not available in our original extracts of administrative data.

Accompanying files

As well as this bulletin, the following products are published as part of this release:

- Two technical guides providing background information on ‘Criminal Court Statistics’ and ‘Statistics on the use of languages and interpreters in courts and tribunals’, including data collection and processing, as well as relevant revisions policies and legislation.
- A set of overview tables, covering each section of this bulletin.
- A set of pivot tables containing Crown Court data broken down by offence group.
- 3 CSV files which feature court level breakdowns of published data:
  - Criminal Courts listings transparency.
  - Criminal Courts timeliness.
  - Crown Court receipts, disposals and outstanding cases by offence group.

National Statistics status

National Statistics status means that official statistics meet the highest standards of trustworthiness, quality and public value.

All official statistics should comply with all aspects of the Code of Practice for Official Statistics. They are awarded National Statistics status following an assessment by the Authority’s regulatory arm. The Authority considers whether the statistics meet the highest standards of Code compliance, including the value they add to public decisions and debate.

It is the Ministry of Justice’s responsibility to maintain compliance with the standards expected for National Statistics. If we become concerned about whether these statistics are still meeting the appropriate standards, we will discuss any concerns with the Authority promptly. National Statistics status can be removed at any point when the highest standards are not maintained, and reinstated when standards are restored.

Contact

Press enquiries should be directed to the Ministry of Justice press office:

Tel: 020 3334 3536 Email: newsdesk@justice.gsi.gov.uk

Other enquiries about these statistics should be directed to the Justice Statistics Analytical Services division of the Ministry of Justice:

Head of Criminal Justice System Statistics Ministry of Justice, 102 Petty France, London, SW1H 9AJ Email: statistics.enquiries@justice.gsi.gov.uk

Next update: 28 September 2017

URL: www.gov.uk/government/statistics/criminal-court-statistics-quarterly-October-to-December-2016

© Crown copyright Produced by the Ministry of Justice

Alternative formats are available on request from statistics.enquiries@justice.gsi.gov.uk